Smith v. St. Peters

• Court: Montana Supreme Court
• Decided: May 31, 2022
• Docket: DA 22-0262
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

L) ORIGINAL 05/31/2022

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA Case Number: DA 22-0262

DA 22-0262 6 JACOB SMITH, MAY 3 1 2022 elovv rl Lir etenvvood Plaintiff and Appellant, Clert, of Supreme Court State of kilontana

v. ORDER ST. PETERS HOSPITAL, BRENNA MANIOON, JACOB WILLIAMS, ANDRE MICHEL, KENDRA SMITH,

Defendants and Appellees.

Jacob Smith has filed a Petition for an Out-of-Time Appeal, and includes a copy of the final judgment. As grounds, Smith states that "Corecivic Correctional Center continues to refuse to honor purchased copy cards and has repeatedly deprived Smith of a typewriter." He includes copies of his purchased copy cards. Smith points out that he cannot hand-write documents because of his disabled writing hand. Smith concludes by claiming a right to access the courts under the First Amendment. M. R. App. P. 4(6) allows this Court to grant an out-of-time appeal "[i]n the infrequent harsh case and under extraordinary circumstances amounting to a gross miscarriage of justice[.]" "Extraordinary circumstances do not include mere mistake, inadvertence, or excusable neglect." M. R. App. P. 4(6). Smith seeks to appeal a February 17, 2022 Order on Motions to Dismiss, issued in the First Judicial District Court, Lewis and Clark County. The District Court dismissed Smith's civil complaint—commenced in January 2019—for several reasons. The court pointed out that Smith did not respond to all opposing parties' motions to dismiss and instead filed an opposed motion to amend his complaint in January 2022. The court stated that: "the proposed amended complaint is offered three years after [Smith] filed his complaint and after all parties have filed substantive and legally supported motions to dismiss the case." The District Court further pointed out that Smith's late-filed motion to amend complaint was "an obvious attempt to avoid dismissal." We conclude that Smith has not established extraordinary circumstances, amounting to a gross miscarriage of justice. M. R. App. P. 4(6). We grant self-represented litigants a certain amount of latitude, but "that latitude cannot be so wide as to prejudice the other party[.]" First Bank (N.A.)-Billings v. Heidema, 219 Mont. 373, 376, 711 P.2d 1384, 1385 (1986). Smith failed to prosecute his case in the District Court, and now months have passed since the judgrnent was entered, an excessive delay. Denial of Smith's Petition will not cause a gross injustice. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that the Petition for an Out-of-Time Appeal is DENIED. The Clerk of the Supreme Court is directed to provide a copy of this Order to counsel of record and to Jacob Smi personally. DATED th.is3 day of May, 2022.

Chief Justice